Digg/Buzz It Up

POLITICO 44

Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer moved ahead with her climate bill on Tuesday, even as Republicans on the committee refused to participate in hearings on the legislation, which is a key priority for the Obama administration and many Democratic lawmakers.

Eleven of the committee’s 12 Democrats attended a hearing about the bill. But only one Republican, Ohio Sen. George Voinovich, stopped by — to give a brief statement laying out the Republican objections to the pace of the legislation.

“I don’t recall ever finding meaningful solutions with incomplete information and partisanship,” he said, requesting that additional analysis be completed on the legislation. “Crafting a bill that reduces emissions without harming the economy will require more than political will.”

Republicans would like an additional five weeks for the Environmental Protection Agency to complete a study of the legislation, sponsored by Boxer and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.).

“The only reason it seems to me one would ask for that is to delay this process,” said Boxer, underscoring Democratic complaints that the committee’s seven Republicans are simply trying to slow progress on the bill.

The EPA has already conducted extensive analysis of the House legislation, and the agency released a second, 38-page analysis of the Kerry-Boxer bill last month. That study, Boxer said, was based on “hundreds of thousands of pages” of background documents.

Another study, said Boxer aides, would cost $140,000 and take roughly five weeks. Amendments passed by the committee would also change any estimates, noted Democrats.

“You put all that together — it’s very, very hard to believe that this argument [for more time] could be made both knowledgeably and in good faith,” said Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse. “We are very, very close to a completely accurate estimate.”

Boxer said that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will commission a full study of the final bill. Six committees are handling sections of the legislation, and Democratic leaders will eventually combine their work into one bill.

The additional study of the final bill all but guarantees that the legislation will not be taken up until at least early next year.

But Republicans insist that analysis has been insufficient to weigh the economic ramifications of the sweeping legislation.

The Senate legislation has significant differences from the House bill, Voinovich said, including more stringent short-term emission targets, fewer emissions allowances and different restrictions on offsets that would be used by polluters to compensate for their greenhouse gas emissions.

The modeling used by the agency, Voinovich also argued, is based on overly optimistic assumptions about the country’s ability to transition to cleaner sources of energy.

We hate boxer and kerry both and it seems that kerry is avoiding any connection between himself and boxer. Perhaps kerry has figured out that this bill sucks and will cause anyone that votes for it to become unemployed.

What a laugh! Spector complaining about how 'partisan' the GOP is being by refusing to roll over and be doormats for the Dem destruction of our country's economy!

No one knows how to be more 'partisan' than the Democrat party: locking Republicans out of meetings, voting down every single amendment they offer, screaming at any mention of disagreement with the Dem party line....what an absurdity the donkey party has become.

It's abundantly clear that 'bi-partisanship' for the Democrats happens only when they get their way all the time on every subject and the GOP simply nod their heads in simplistic agreement.

Kind of like spoiled children who whine when other kids won't share their toys with them (it's not fair!!!!), but who refuse to share their toys with anyone else.

What climate change--show me some real figures about warming or that co2 is harmful. It would seem to me that since co2 is utilized by plants to produce more 0xygen that it is maybe beneficial to growing crops. It is simply a way to transfer wealth to poor countries. Maybe if those countries had less graft and theft by their leaders they could be more self sufficient. China and India are laughing at us and will not try to control greenhouse emissions. Have you been to China lately. Smog capital of the world--skies grey, water polluted, and industrial production going through the roof and people's lives improving. Cap and tax will move the U.S. backward, lower our standard of living, and do nothing to control the environment. It will Double your electric bill, cause you to drive small unsafe cars (remember unsafe at any speed), and bankrupt the country. So much for forward looking. The scientific facts DONOT back up the hype.

1) How much will this bill cost every citizen in the USA if passed in higher costs, fees, taxes, etc?

2) How many jobs will be lost due to this bill?

3) How much GDP will be lost due to this bill?

4) How much wealthier will Al Gore be when the bill is passed?

Oh I know the democrats will talk about "Green Jobs" being created. Yeah great jobs - pay around $8 per hour. In their place we will lose oil and gas jobs that pay $150,000 per year and other union jobs at coal mines, power plants and other places with generous salaries, benefits and pensions.

It is noteworthy that Boxer is pushing this scheme forward, knowing that it will cost billions and force many businesses to lay off workers -- neither being what her constituents want to have happen -- yet her first attack against her new opponent is that Fiorina obeyed orders to cut expenses by moving some of HP's jobs out of the US.

In other words: "My opponent is evil for eliminating a few thousand American jobs, but you aren't supposed to notice that I'm trying to trash the whole economy and get a million workers onto the government dole!"

In other words: "My opponent is evil for eliminating a few thousand American jobs, but you aren't supposed to notice that I'm trying to trash the whole economy and get a million workers onto the government dole!"

What a bizarre line of reasoning. Boxer is aligning the US with the energy economy of the 21st century. If we miss this boat - we will be a third world nation. How can all your right wing economic wizards miss this? Probably the same reason you right wingers put us in this recession - you don't really know as much as you think you know - to our mutual peril.

The voters have spoken - now either contribute ideas, or please go away. This issue is to important for your partisan games. We need to handle climate change NOW.

"either contribute ideas, or please go away. This issue is to important for your partisan games."

Contribute to what? A bill that will destroy our way of life and will do absolutely nothing to solve the global warming problem?

My god man, wake up! If the Arctic sea ice melts, how many feet will the ocean rise? ZERO!!! This is a simple physics problem from high school. When water freezes it expands by 10%. The density is 90% that of water, so 10% of your ice cube or ice berg sticks out of the water. When it melts again, you end up in the exact same place you started.

Polar bears are endangered? We have 4 times as many now as we've ever had by actual census estimates. How can that be endangered?

CO2 is .39% of our atmosphere. almost 4 cents out of $10,000. How much affect does 8 cents have on any decision you make with your checkbook when you buy a car? Water vapor is 75% of the greenhouse gas. Yet hydrogen fuel cells is one silver bullet to our energy needs. What is the exhaust there? WATER VAPOR! DUH! 97% of the CO2 around here is natural. More CO2 produced has historically produced more plant life which leads to more oxygen.

If CO2 is so bad, then why does ALGore fly around in a 1972 Lear jet whereever he goes? Why are there 5 Suburbans on deck to carry him 6 blocks to his next speech? Geez, he doesn't believe this BS himself!

In the 70's your kind was worried about global cooling. In the 90's in was global warming. Dang, it's been cooling again for 10 years while the CO2 concentration could have only gone up since we haven't implemented these safeguards yet. How can that be? Guess we better call it climate change now instead.

There is no real data that says anything has warmed beyond normal fluctuations. It's all based on computer models that if you ran them backwards wouldn't get to where you were in 1970. They can't tell me what the weather will be next week; how the hell can you depend on them to forecast 50 years?

If you want to participate in this fraud, fine, but leave me and my life alone.

My god man, wake up! If the Arctic sea ice melts, how many feet will the ocean rise? ZERO!!! This is a simple physics problem from high school. When water freezes it expands by 10%. The density is 90% that of water, so 10% of your ice cube or ice berg sticks out of the water. When it melts again, you end up in the exact same place you started.

Wow. Your ignorance is stunning! Ice expands 4% when frozen. Greenland's ice is on the ground, not in the water -so when it melts (which scientists have been ringing alarms about because it is happening so much FASTER than IPCC 2007 predicted) all that volume will raise the oceans. Droughts, rising oceans, acidified (and therefore less able to support life) oceans, lack of icecaps (no more reflecting light away - therefor more likely run-away greenhouse effect) are all happening - no matter how tightly you shut your eyes and chant lalalalalala I am not listening.

So, the absolute last thing I will allow is for your ignorance to mess with the planet - for my sake and for the sake of the human species. If you like it so hot - move to venus. We have no plans of allowing your anti-science ideology ruin it for the rest of us.

I didn't respond to the rest of your message - repeat above technique - start with what you said, add facts and common sense for each item - I just don't have time to deal with every stupid thing you can manage to type.